
Qass T W SO b 
Book . L 5 



BAPTISM 



TAUGHT IN THE SCRIPTURES 



RHYS R. LLOYD, A.M. 

Professor of New Testament Greek and Exegesis in the 
Pacific Theological Seminary 



BOSTON AND CHICAGO 

Congregational ^untJao^&rijool anfc ^ufrltsijmg 
Society 






Copyright, 1895, 
By Congregational Sunday-School and Publishing Society. 



^Ore^ Theol Hera. 



tnes T>**1£ -^ 



UP* » 



TO MY FATHER 
RHYS W. LLOYD 

THIS BOOK IS 
AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED 



PREFACE. 



The author of the following treatise never heard 
a sermon or a lecture on baptism from any member 
of the denominations which do not practice immer- 
sion. Before studying the subject of baptism for 
the first time, he vowed that he would follow the 
facts of the Bible whithersoever they should lead. 
After making an inductive study of the subject as 
taught in the Bible, the authorities to whom he has 
given the most careful, candid, and prolonged study 
belong to the Baptist denomination. As I under- 
took the study at the urgent solicitation of the 
members of a Chicago Congregational church, so I 
publish the results of that study at the earnest 
and repeated entreaties of those who have read, 
heard, and studied these results. 

My aim is to guide the student in the study rather 

than to furnish results. Yet enough of these, I 

trust, have been given to make clear my position. 

If this will help any one to knowledge, I shall be 

satisfied. 

R. R. L. 



INTRODUCTION. 



To understand the use of the verb " baptizein," 
we must study the passages where it occurs, their 
contexts, the prepositions used with the verb, and 
the objects with or into which men are baptized. 
We need not necessarily study the use of the verb 
in the classics, for frequently there exists between 
the classic and the Biblical meanings a great 
gulf. In the present instance, however, we shall 
find that the Biblical and classic uses have many 
resemblances. 

Furthermore, there is no necessity whatever for 
discussing, in connection with our topic, the mean- 
ing of the Greek verb " baptein,'"' inasmuch as this 
verb is never used in Scripture of dipping men. 



Baptism as Taught in the Scriptures- 



CHAPTER I. 

THE USE OF "BAPTIZEIN " IN THE OLD 
TESTAMENT. 

At the outset, let it be clearly under- 
stood that in the Old Testament no man 
is mentioned as baptizing another. No 
man is ever said to baptize himself as a 
strictly religious act, unless we choose to 
regard all the ablutions of the Hebrews 
as distinctly religious. They may be re- 
garded as such. The baptism of Naaman 
was perhaps a clinic process. It was not 
intended to establish a religious precedent. 
No one, so far as we know, imitated him. 
He only is spoken of as baptizing in the 
Jordan. 



8 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

Judith " baptized herself " or "was bap- 
tized " (for the verb may be passive) " in 
the camp at (Gr., epi with the genitive 
case, upon) the fountain of water " 
(Judith 12 : 7 ; cf. Ex. 2 : 5). This " baptiz- 
ing," as verse 9 shows, was a purifying 
process (" and she entered clean "). This 
is further confirmed by the fact that this 
" baptizing " was performed on three suc- 
cessive nights. The method of purifying 
among the Jews and its bearing upon this 
verse will be considered later. 

The "baptism from the dead " (Sir. 31 : 
30 ; Eng. Ver. 34 : 25) deserves careful and 
patient attention, for it throws great light 
upon the use of the word " baptizein " 
among the Jews before the time of Jesus. 
This verb is translated by Dr. Conant, a 
Baptist scholar, " immersing himself f rom 
a dead body, and touching it again, what 
is he profited by his bathing ? " But Dr. 

1 The references are to Swete's Septuagint, 



The Use of " Baptizein." 9 

E. B. Fairfield, in his learned " Letters on 
Baptism/' published by the Congrega- 
tional Sunday-School and Publishing So- 
ciety, renders it : " He that is purified 
(Gr., baptizomenos) from a dead body, and 
touches it again, what does his cleansing 
profit him ?" (p. 71). 

Between these translations there is a 
great difference. Which is correct ? Be- 
fore attempting to answer this question, 
let me give a closer rendering : " Baptizing 
himself (or ' Having been baptized ') from 
a dead (body), and touching it again, what 
profiteth his laver (literally, bath ; hence, 
bathing, washing, cf. Tit. 3:5; Eph. 5 : 
26) ? " 

The correctness of the translations 
previously given can be easily decided 
after a little Biblical study by means of 
the Septuagint. 

We first notice that the Greek verb 
" baptizomenos " may be in the passive or 



io Baptism in the Scriptures. 

middle voice. If it is in the middle, 
it should be read " baptizing himself." In 
favor of the passive voice the following 
evidence seems conclusive : — 

The person who defiled himself by 
touching a dead body did not become 
clean by "baptizing himself." The laws 
about his cleansing are recorded in Num. 
19: 11-20; Dr. Alvah Hovey admits this. 1 
These laws, as given in the Septuagint, 
read : " Every one who toucheth the dead 
body of any man shall be unclean seven 
days. He shall be purifi,ed (passive voice, 
' hagnisthasetai ') on the third and on the 
seventh day, and he shall be clean. But 
if he shall not be purified (' apagnistha/ 
passive voice) on the third day and on 
the seventh day, he shall not be clean. 
Every one who toucheth the dead body of a 
man that hath died, if he die and is not puri- 
fied (passive voice, 'apagnistha), defileth 

1 Baptist Quarterly, April, 1875. 



The Use of " Baptizein" u 

the tent of the Lord. That person (Gr., soul, 
life) shall be cut off from Israel, because 
the water of sprinkling was not sprinkled 
(passive voice, i perierantistha ') upon him. 
He is unclean. His uncleanness is still in 
(or on) him " (vs. n-13). . . . 

" And whosoever toucheth upon the 
field (plain) one that is slain with the 
sword, or a dead body, or the bone of a 
man, or a tomb, shall be unclean seven 
days. And they shall take for the unclean 
from the ashes of that which is burnt for 
purification ; and pour forth upon it living 
water (' ekcheousin ep' autan hudor zon/ 
1 Living water ' is water in motion as in a 
brook, or that which is poured or sprinkled) 
into a vessel} And a clean man shall take 
hyssop and dip it into the water, and shall 
sprinkle upon the house, and upon the 
furniture, and upon every person (Gr., soul, 

1 Cf. Josephus, Ant. Bk. IV, chap. 4, sect. 6: " Having bap- 
tized some of this ashes into a spring, they sprinkled it the third 
day and the seventh." 



12 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

life) of the family, as many as are there 
and upon him who touched the bone of a 
man, or the slain body, or the dead body, 
or the tomb. And the clean man shall 
sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day 
and on the seventh day, and he shall be 
purified (passive voice, ' apagnisthasetai ') 
on the seventh day. And he (that is, ' the 
clean person ' ; cf. vs. 7, 8, 10) shall wash 
his garments and bathe with water 
(' lousetai hudati ') and he shall be un- 
clean until evening. And the man who- 
soever is defiled (passive voice) and is not 
purified (passive voice), that person shall 
be destroyed from the midst of the con- 
gregation, because he defiled the sanctuary 
of the Lord, because the water of sprink- 
ling was not sprinkled (' perierantistha/ 
passive voice) upon him y is unclean. And 
it shall be to you an eternal custom. 
And he who sprinkle th the water of 
sprinkling shall wash his garments, and he 



The Use of " Baptizein" 13 

who touches the water of sprinkling shall 
be unclean until evening " (vs. 16-21). 

The use of the passive voice of the 
unclean man, coupled with the express 
statements of verses 17, 18, 19, 21, which 
teach us that " the water of sprinkling " 
was sprinkled upon the unclean by clean 
persons, proves indisputably that the "bap- 
tizing from the dead " was not done by 
the unclean person himself. This being 
true, it follows inevitably that the verse in 
Sirach, which refers to this process, must 
be rendered, " He that is baptized," or 
" Having been baptized." We know that 
this is correct from the fact that the 
Orientals never bathe themselves. The 
bathing is done by relatives, friends, at- 
tendants, or by the professional bathers 
(the balaneus and his helpers — the para- 
chutaiy pourers). The Eastern people, 
however, use both the middle and passive 
voices of the verbs in speaking of this 



14 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

passive process, because what you permit, 
or command, to be done is commonly- 
said to be done by you (cf. John 4: 1, 2; 
Acts 2:38 with 5:31). But the actual 
method is accurately described only by 
the service of a passive verb. 

But Dr. Hovey maintains * that " the 
context " of the passage in Sirach " shows 
that the participle, * baptizomenos/ is prob- 
ably in the middle voice, and, therefore, 
refers to the final bathing " (Gr., lotitro 
autou, by the laver, bathing of him), 
"spoken of in Num. 19:19, by which 
the purification was completed, rather than 
to the sprinkling of the water of purifica- 
tion by a clean person. There is no par- 
ticle of evidence that this final bathing 
was not accomplished by immersing the 
body in water." 

In respect to the middle voice nothing 
more need be said. In answer to the 

1 Bapt. Quar., April, 1875. 



The Use of " Baptize in" 15 

assertion that the participle " baptizome- 
nos " is employed of the final self -bathing, 
we offer, in addition to the evidence 
already offered (p. 9), the following : — 

1. The context of Num. 19 : 19 states in 
unmistakable terms that the purification 
of the person who had touched a dead 
body depended, not upon his self-bathing, 
but solely upon the sprinkling upon him of 
the water of purification by a clean person 
(vs. 13, 17, 18, 19, 20). The use of the 
verbs in the passive voice confirms my 
statement. 

2. The subject of the verbs, "wash" 
and "bathe," in verse 19, is the clean 
person, who is the subject of the preced- 
ing active verb, "sprinkle" (Num. 19: 19). 
Only of the clean person (cf. vs. 18, 19, 21) 
and persons (v. 17) is the active voice used 
in this context. Since, then, this context 
uses only passive verbs of the unclean, 
and only active of the clean, it follows 



1 6 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

that the verbs, "wash" and "bathe," of 
verse 19, are used of the clean person. 
No indication is given of any change in 
the subjects of these active verbs. 

3. In this context, the duty of purifying 
is laid upon the clean persons (vs. 1-10, 
17-19, 21). The unclean is regarded as 
unfit to serve God until he has been 
cleansed. 

4. The persons, in this context, who 
"wash their garments " and "bathe their 
bodies with water " are the clean (vs. 7, 8, 
10, 21), who have been making prepara- 
tions for the purification of the unclean, 
or who have been purifying him ; conse- 
quently they are the persons enjoined, in 
verse 19, to perform these duties. 

5. The unclean person and all that per- 
tains to him (furniture, house, etc.) are 
purified by the water of purification which 
is sprinkled upon them (v. 18) on the third 
and seventh days. Not a particle of 



The Use of " Baptizein." 17 

evidence has been adduced to show that the 
cleansing process was completed by the 
self-bathing of the unclean. Self-bathing, 
as I have shown, was never practiced 
among the Jews of Scripture times. 

6. The unclean person is unclean for 
seven days and is purified (not purifies 
himself, v. 19) on the seventh day ; but 
the clean person who accomplishes the 
purification becomes unclean only during 
portions of the third and seventh days — 
the days when he sprinkles the unclean, 
or prepares for it (vs. 7, 8, 10, 21, 22, 
" unclean until evening"). This being 
true, the phrase "unclean until evening" 
(v. 19) shows that the words "wash" and 
"bathe" (v. 19) apply to the clean. 

These facts, with all those in the context, 
combine to prove that the phrase of 
Sirach, "His bathing" (Gr., laver; cf. 
Eph. 5 : 26), does not refer to any act of 
the unclean person. He is the object, not 



1 8 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

the subject, of the bathing (cf. Tit. 3 : 5). 
In these New Testament passages the 
noun "laver" is used of the work of the 
bather. 



CHAPTER II. 

BAPTISM FROM THE DEAD. 

We are now prepared to consider the 
bold and unqualified statement, " There is 
no particle of evidence that this final bath- 
ing was not accomplished by immersing 
the body in water." 

In reply, it may be said that the evi- 
dence given in the preceding pages shows 
that this "final bathing" (Numbers) was the 
act, not of the unclean, but of the clean 
person ; hence the phrase, " baptized from 
the dead," must refer to the sprinkling of 
water upon the unclean, because by this 
only was he cleansed (Num. 19 : 13, 20). 
It may be now said, without fear of 
contradiction from facts, that not a particle 

of evidence is furnished by the Old Testa- 
19 



20 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

ment which shows that the Jews of the 
times of Moses or of Sirach bathed by im- 
mersing themselves, or by being immersed 
into water by others. All of the ritual 
bathing was performed by the application 
of water to persons. In proof of this we 
offer two lines of evidence, the linguistic 
and that of custom. 

I. THE LINGUISTIC. 

In the chapter on purification and bath- 
ing (Num. xix) the Septuagint renders 
the Hebrew by the phrase " bathe (with) 
water" (vs. 7, 19). There is no preposi- 
tion in the Greek ; hence the term 
" water " seems to designate the means or 
instrument, rather than the element in 
which the cleansing was accomplished. 
This construction is the one used through- 
out the Septuagint, except in two passages 
(Ex. 29 : 4; Lev. 14 : 8). The manner in 
which the ritual was carried out confirms 



Baptism from the Dead. 21 

this interpretation. Other linguistic facts 
will be presented in the following discus- 
sion of the Jewish custom of bathing. 

2. THE CUSTOM OF THE JEWS. 

A study of this subject in the Bible 
shows us that the bathing was performed 
as we have already taught (pp. 11, 16). The 
laver and its uses, or the act of bathing, 
are mentioned, not only in the passages 
previously discussed, but also in the fol- 
lowing 1 : — Ex. 2:5; 29 : 4 ; Lev. 14:8; 
16:24 (" louo" to bathe; cf. Ex. 30:18; 
38 : 26-32, " nipto" to wash a part) ; 3 Ki. 
20: 19 ; 22 : 38 ; 4 Ki. 5 : 10, 12, 13 ; Ps. 
6:6; Cant. 5:12; etc. In Ex. 2 : 5 we 
read that the daughter of Pharaoh "went 
down to bathe at (Gr., ' epi,' upon) the 
river.' ' 

A picture discovered at Thebes seems 
to represent a lady taking a bath, " where 

1 References are to the Septuagint. 



22 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

one servant holds a lotus bud to the nose 
of the bather, another pours perfumed 
water over the head, while yet another 
rubs her arms and body with the palms of 
her hands." 1 

Pharaoh's daughter was doubtless bathed 
in this manner by her handmaids. In 
the Homeric and Roman baths the vessel 
" seems not to have contained water itself, 
but to have been used for the bather to 
sit in while water was poured over him." 2 

In his Charicles, Becker writes of the 
Grecian public baths as follows : " In the 
vase paintings we never meet with any 
basin or tub, wherein bathers might stand 
or sit. There is always a round or oval 
basin, resting on one foot, beside which the 
bathers stand quite naked to wash them- 
selves." 3 The bathing was accomplished 

1 Ancient Egypt in the Light of Modern Discoveries, by Davis 
and Cobern, p. 367. Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians. 

2 American Cyclopedia; cf. Becker's Gallus. 

8 Charicles, pp. 148-150. The italics are mine. 



Baptism from the Dead. 23 

by the application of water to the person. 
In some of these Grecian pictures, the 
water descends upon the bathers in a 
shower; in others, persons are present 
who pour warm or cold water upon the 
bather. 1 

The public bathing in Palestine of one 
of her sex is thus described by Miss M. E. 
Rogers : " She is placed on a marble plat- 
form near a jet of hot water. Fuller's earth 
is rubbed on her head, she is lathered with 
soap, and brushed with a handful of tow. 
Hot water is poured over her freely" etc. 2 
Bathing in Asia Minor to-day is always by 
pouring water upon persons. 

Owing to the different interpretations 
of the pictures in the Roman catacombs, 
I will simply claim that they seem to be in 
accord with the bathing customs of the 
Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans. 

1 Becker's Charicles, p. 151 ; cf., also, Smith's Dictionary of 
Greek and Roman Antiquities. 

2 Domestic Life in Palestine, p. 113. 



24 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

Aaron and his son were bathed (Gr., 
louseis autous) with water taken from the 
laver (Ex. 29 : 4 ; cf. 40 : 10 ; Lev. 8:6; 
Heb. 10 : 22). This bathing was per- 
formed at the door of the tent. The use 
of the Greek verb in the Septuagint shows 
that the mode was not immersion. In 
Psalm 6 : 6 we read : " Every night will I 
bathe my bed." Here the bathing is done 
by the falling tears. The bed is not dipped 
into the tears. Canticles 5:12 speaks of 
"eyes bathed with (Gr., 'en,' in) milk," 
which evidently indicates the application 
of milk to the eyes. 1 Kings 20 : 19 
teaches that the harlots shall bathe with 
(Gr., " in ") the blood of Ahab. This 
bathing could not refer to immersion. 

The use made of the temple baths, 
namely, to hold water for the washing 
("nipto y " wash a part) of the hands and 
feet of the priests, shows that the bathing 
was not by immersion (Gr.," wash from, or 



Baptism from the Dead. 25 

out of it," Ex. 30: 19, 20, 21 ; 38 : 27). 
Cleansing by means of the bath is bath- 
ing. Josephus confirms the preceding 
statements, for he writes of these baths : 
" From which the priests might wash 
their hands and pour (katacheo) copiously 
upon the feet" x He writes in another 
place : " Having purified (cf. Num. xix) 
them with spring water and ointment, 
they became God's priests. ,,2 In this 
sentence he refers to the double process 
of " bathing with water " and " anoint- 
ing with oil" (Ex. 29:4, 7). And as the 
latter was accomplished by pouring, so the 
former ; hence " en hudati " means " with 
water." The laws of purification (Num. 
xix) require in every case the process of 
sprinkling or pouring. In harmony with 
this are John 2:6; Heb. 9:13, which 
describe this purification. Compare also 
Psalm 51: 7, 3 "Sprinkle me with hyssop 

1 Antiq. Bk. Ill, chap. 6:2. » Antiq. Bk. Ill, chap. 8 : 6. 
8 Sept. 50: 9. 



26 Baptism in the Scriptures, 

and I shall be clean " (the same verbs as in 
Num. xix). This verse shows the mode 
and also the fact that only the sprinkling 
was necessary for cleansing. Compare, 
also, " I will sprinkle upon you clean water 
and ye shall be clean from all your unright- 
eousness and from all your idols " (Ezek. 
36:25). 

In view then of all the preceding Biblical 
and extra-Biblical facts, we clearly see that 
the bold statement made by Professor 
Hovey respecting the mode of bathing is 
contrary to the teaching of historical facts. 
It is favored only by the erroneous inter- 
pretation of a part of Num. 19 : 19. Even 
if we admit that the baptizing refers to 
the bathing, we see that we have no evi- 
dence whatever for believing that this was 
performed by immersion. 

But from the evidence which has been 
presented, we see that "baptizein" is a 
synonym of the verb "louo," to bathe. 



Baptism from the Dead. 27 

This is evident from the fact that, in the 
verse in Sirach, "baptized" and "his 
laver," or "bathing" denote the same act 
of purification. The teaching of Judith 
12:7 ("She was baptized . . . and came 
clean/' cf. v. 9 and 10:17; 12:15) sup- 
ports the same thought. Additional sup- 
port is derived from the narrative concern- 
ing the cleansing of Naaman (2 Kings 5 : 
10-14). The prophet bade him: "Bathe 
seven times in the Jordan and thou 
shalt be clean" (vs. 10, 13). Naaman 
went u and was baptized, or baptized him- 
self, and was cleansed" (v. 14). The 
cleansing of lepers was done by sprinkling 
(Lev. 14:7). The prophet had this in 
mind. The process was a purifying, bath- 
ing (cf. John 13:5-10; Eph. 5:25-27; 
Tit. 3 : 5, "laver of restoration ") process ; 
hence it was performed, as we have seen, 
by the pouring of living water upon him 
by his servants. Maimonides tells us 



28 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

that "living water is water taken from a 
font, or from a rapidly flowing stream." 
This pouring of water upon one is there- 
fore called " baptizing." In harmony with 
this is the expression of Isaiah, " Lawless- 
ness baptizes me" (Is. 21 -.4, LXX). Dr. 
Conant translates this, " Iniquity whelms 
me." To whelm is to 4 cover over by 
coming upon. 



CHAPTER III. 

THE BEARING OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 
UPON THE NEW TESTAMENT USAGE. 

The facts already furnished show us 

clearly that "to pour forth " is not a 

figurative, but the ritualistic meaning of 

the verb "baptize" in the Old Testament. 

This is its only meaning in both the 

canonical and apocryphal books. In full 

accord with this is the use of the noun 

"baptism," in i Pet. 3:21, which makes 

it evident that the noun usually meant 

"the putting away of the filth of the 

flesh" (cf. Heb. 9:13, 14). Josephus 

teaches us that John the Baptist bade the 

Jews "to practice virtue, exercising both 

righteousness one toward another, and 

reverence toward God, and to come to 
29 



30 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

baptism ; for the baptism received by him 
appeared to be used not for the pardon of 
some sins, but for the purification of the 
body, inasmuch as the soul has been purified 
beforehand by righteousness." 1 The Es- 
senic bathing with cold water was practiced 
for the purification of the body ("Bathing 
frequently day and night with cold water 
for purification "). 2 The testimony of 
Josephus agrees with the teaching of 
Matt. 3 : 1-12 ; 21 : 32 ; Mark 1 : 2-8 ; 
Luke 1:15-17; 3 : 1-20; John 1 : 19-31 ; 
3 : 22-26 ; 4:1,2; Acts 15:9. It shows 
clearly to us that the baptizing by John gave 
rise to the discussion about purification 
(John 3 : 22-26). 

The preceding facts make it evident to 
me that the verb "baptize" when used of 
the Baptist denotes, in accordance with 
the universal Jewish custom, the ritualistic 



lAntiq. Bk. XVIII, chap. 5: 2. 

2 Life of Josephus, 3 ; The Jewish Wars, Bk. II, chap. 8 : 5, 9, 10. 



Bearing on the New Testament. 31 

purification of men by the application of 
water to them. The mode must have 
been the Jewish mode, otherwise it would 
have provoked both astonishment and op- 
position. Instead of causing these effects, 
it is regarded as the mode which the 
prophets or the Messiah would employ 
(John 1 : 25), and which would certainly be 
the Jewish mode. But Jewish priests and 
prophets had never immersed men ; they 
purified their people in the present East- 
ern mode of cleansing congregations, by 
sprinkling water upon them with a hyssop. 
It seems that no other mode would be 
acceptable to the ascetic Jewish baptizer 
and his hearers. 

From the point now gained, the signifi- 
cance of the phrase, " fulfill all righteous- 
ness," when used of baptizing, is evident. 
Jesus, like Aaron and his sons, is to be 
purified before beginning his official career. 
He needs to be baptized because he is by 



32 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

this act made manifest to Israel as the 
one who has been officially appointed by 
God to cleanse his people from all unclean- 
ness (cf. Lev. xiii, xiv ; Numb, xix with 
John i : 31 ; 15:3; Eph. 5 : 26 ; Heb. 
9 : 10; Tit. 2 : 14; 3:5). 

The ritualistic use of " baptizein " in 
the Old Testament prepares the student 
for the use of it by Jesus and his apostles. 
These use it as the equivalent of the 
verbs " to come upon " (Acts 1 : 8, cf. v. 5), 
" to pour forth " (cf. Acts 1 : 5 with 2:17, 
18, 33, etc.), "to fall upon" (Acts 10:44; 
11 : 15, 16), and "to clothe" (cf. Luke 24: 
49 with Acts 1 : 5, 8 and Gal. 3 : 27). This 
ritualistic meaning of this verb, I must 
repeat, is not "tropical or figurative," but 
it is the only Old Testament religious 
signification the verb has. It may, indeed, 
be called "its literal meaning," for out of 
the thirty-nine examples from Greek litera- 
ture, previous to a.d. 50, where the literal 



Bearing on the New Testament. 33 

meaning, according to Dr. Conant, is used, 
fifteen denote the process of " submerg- 
ing, overwhelming." Not one of the 
thirty-nine refers to the performance of a 
religious rite ; several of them do not 
imply the use of water ; two or three refer 
to bathing, and only eleven speak of " bap- 
tizing " men. These examples, as thus 
classified, show us the usage of the pre- 
Christian classical literature. Throughout 
this period, in heathen Greek literature, 
the verb " baptizein," with or without the 
preposition "in" or "into" (eis), is never 
used to describe the performance of a reli- 
gious rite by immersion of men by man} 
This statement is true of even Josephus. 
This fact itself is sufficient to show that 
this verb, when used of the Jewish re- 
ligious ceremony performed by John upon 
men, must describe the act of purifying 2 

1 Cf. Conant's Baptizein: its Meaning and Uses. 
2 Cf. Josephus as above (p. 30) . 



34 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

by sprinkling or pouring ; because only in 
this way were men purified, baptized. The 
baptizing of men with water in the New 
Testament might naturally be expected to 
conform to this Jewish ritualistic method ; 
and must be regarded as thus performed 
until evidence is presented which proves 
the opposite. 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE SIGNIFICATION OF " BAPTIZEIN " IN 
THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

We are now prepared to investigate in 
detail the meaning of the verb in the New 
Testament. Its Biblical meaning may or 
may not differ widely from its classical, as 
is the case with many other words com- 
mon to these two sources. Since this is 
so, the only sure way to ascertain the 
usage of the New Testament is by an 
exhaustive examination of the same. No 
appeal need be made to classical usage, 
except when it is impossible to discover 
clearly the significance of a passage. 
Even then the Old Testament usage 
should be first consulted, and heeded, 
rather than the classical, providing it ren- 

35 



$6 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

ders the light needed to illumine the pas- 
sage and the context under consideration. 

Beginning with the prediction of the 
Baptist, " I baptize you with water ; but 
he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit " 
(Matt. 3:11; Mark 1 : 8), let us apply our- 
selves to our task. 

In these passages we see the verb 
" baptizein " used by John, in precisely 
similar constructions of the acts of two 
different persons (himself and Jesus). 
The acts are performed at different times 
and places. Evidently the verb bears the 
same signification in both parts of the 
verse. The language of John certainly 
gives no evidence that the verb signifies 
in the one clause " immersion/' in the 
other, "affusion." The Holy Spirit is un- 
questionably depicted in these verses, not 
as a person, but as a liquid element (cf. 
Joel 2 : 28-32 ; Acts ii). The use of the 
epithet with "baptizein " and " ekchein " 



"Baptizein" in the New Testament. 37 

(Acts 2 : 17, 18), "to pour forth," proves 
this (cf. also "fell," Acts 10:44, 45)- 
Since the foregoing statements are true, 
then the mastery of the meaning of the 
verb with either of the phrases which 
denote the liquid element ("Holy Spirit," 
"water"), will be the mastery of its sig- 
nification with the other. The doubtful 
phrase is "baptize with water." If we 
can ascertain the force of the verb in the 
expression "baptize with the Holy Spirit," 
then its significance in the other phrase 
will be apparent. The whole matter thus 
resolves itself into a question of historical 
fact which can be positively answered. 
How, then, is the question, were men 
baptized with the Holy Spirit ? 

The words of the Baptist were fulfilled 
on the day of Pentecost (cf. Acts 1 : 5-8 
with 2:16-39; 11:15-17, etc.). This 
" baptiziiig with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 
1 : 5-8) denotes the same act as that 



38 Baptism in the Scriptures, 

denoted by the words " pouring forth of the 
Spirit upon" (Acts 2:17, 18, 33), "fell 
upon " (Acts 10 : 44 ; 1 1 : 15), "send upon " 
(Luke 24 : 49 ; cf . Acts 1 : 5, 8), " come 
upon " (Acts 1 :5, 8), "put on" as a gar- 
ment (Gal. 3:27; cf. Luke 24 : 49 ; Acts. 
1 • 5) J " gi ve the Holy Spirit to " a person 
(Acts 5 : 32; 11 : 17; 8 : 18 ; 15 :8). Now, 
then, if to be "baptized" with the Holy 
Spirit is to have the Holy Spirit " poured 
upon," " come upon " a person ; then to be 
" baptized with (Gr., 'en? in) water" is to 
have the water "poured upon" or "come 
upon" the baptized. This seems indisputa- 
ble; for the Baptist (Matt. 3:11, etc.), 
Jesus (Acts 1 : 5), and Peter (Acts 11 : 16) 
are unquestionably using the verb in the 
same sense. But Peter is the one who 
identifies the baptizing with the out-pour- 
ing, "falling upon" (Acts 2 : 17, 18, etc.). 
No one can doubt that Jesus, in Acts 
1:5,8, denotes the same act by " baptize " 



"Baptizein" in the New Testament, 39 

and " come upon " (cf. also " endue/' " be 
clothed," Luke 24 : 49). Compare also the 
"clothed " of Luke 24:49 with the "put 
on " of Gal. 3 : 27, for they represent the 
same Greek word. In both passages the 
"endue," "put on," are equivalent to 
"baptize with or in." These facts prove 
that the verb " baptize " denotes the same 
as " pour upon," etc. To prove that it 
does not, is consequently the task which 
Scripture lays upon the immersionist. 

It has been said that the clause "Bap- 
tize with the Holy Spirit " contains the 
figurative use of the verb ; then the 
figurative sense, if this assertion be true, 
is the only sense with which we have to 
do ; for this " baptism with the Holy 
Spirit," according to the testimony of the 
Baptist, of Jesus, of Peter, and of Luke, 
is the only baptism which Jesus was going 
to give to his followers. We have, how- 
ever, proven already that "to pour upon," 



40 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

"come upon " (cf. submerge, overwhelm, 
" bathe " in Sirach 34 : 25 1 ; Judith 12 : 6-9 ; 
and 2 Kings 5 : 10-14; Is. 21 :4 2 ) are the 
literal (pp. 19-23) and ritualistic meanings 
of this verb. The former (the literal) is 
classical ; the latter (the ritualistic) is 
Biblical. The New Testament usage ac- 
cords therefore with both usages. 

The ritualistic signification is synony- 
mous with " cleansing by sprinkling " 
(pp. 7-23). This signification will satisfy 
every passage where baptism with water 
is mentioned in the New Testament. It 
may be well to recall that the cleansing, 
baptizing, of men with water was, and 
is, performed by the Jewish and Greek 
churches by sprinkling water upon them 
with hyssop, not by immersion. Apply this 
to Matt. 3 :6, "They" ("all the people") 
"were purified, cleansed by him in the 
Jordan, confessing their sins." He doubt- 

1 Sept. 31 : 30. 2 Sept. text. 



"Baptizein M in the New Testament. 41 

less sprinkled them with water by means 
of a hyssop ; for this was the customary 
method of purifying (cf. Ezek 36 : 2s 1 ). Try 
it in Matt. 3:7: " But when he saw many 
of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to 
his purification" (cleansing; Gr., baptism, 
cf. Josephus as given on p. 25). This 
signification, if applied to Mark 7 : 2-5, 
satisfies the demands of the passage, 
"Some of his disciples ate their bread 
with defiled (Gr., ' common '), that is, 
unwashen hands. For the Pharisees, and 
all the Jews, except they wash their hands 
with the fist (cf. Ex. 21:18; Is. 58:4, 
the only places where the Greek term is 
used), eat not, holding the tradition of the 
elders. And when they come from the 
market, except they cleanse (purify, Gr., 
' baptize ' ) themselves, they eat not. And 
there are many other things, which they 
have received to hold, (Gr., ' baptisms ') 

IPs. 51: 7. 



42 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

cleansing of cups, and pots, and brazen 
vessels. And the Pharisees and the scribes 
ask him, Why do not thy disciples walk 
according to the tradition of the elders, but 
eat their bread with defiled hands?" 
There can be no doubt, it seems to me, 
that the thought of this whole passage 
turns upon the idea of purification. And 
this was performed, as we have seen, by 
the application of water to the person. 
We have already shown that the noun 
" baptism " was used of this application by 
Josephus, and that the verb " baptizein " 
was employed to denote " pouring forth." 
These significations fully satisfy the de- 
mands of this passage. Jewish custom 
teaches us that only this signification is 
applicable and tenable (cf. John 2 : 6). 

As to the force of the expression " wash 
their hands with the fist," consult the 
views of Dr. M. C. Hazard in The Con- 
gregationalism who, in a conversation with 



"Baptizein" in the New Testament. 43 

a Jewish rabbi, ascertained that the Jews 
baptize their hands by " pouring from some 
vessel by main strength from one hand upon 
the other" This, or that suggested by 
Dr. Fairfield's " Letters on Baptism," or 
both, is unquestionably the correct ex- 
planation. Dr. Fairfield, alluding to a 
practice among modern Orientals, says : 
" Sometimes there is no vessel which the 
man can lift even ' by main strength/ and 
in that case he takes up a ' fist ' full of 
water — say in his right hand — and pours 
it or sprinkles it upon the left. The left 
is thus cleansed. But although the right 
has gone into the water, it is not yet 
cleansed ; for it went only into stagnant 
water. The left ' fist ' in like manner is 
used to cleanse the right hand by water 
set in motion." 2 This process is carried 
out daily. The further uses of the verb are 
discussed in other parts of this treatise. 

1 Letters on Baptism, p. in. 



CHAPTER V. 



CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE CONSTRUCTIONS 
OF THE VERB. 

Our study of the present subject would 
be very imperfect, unless we classified and 
discussed thoroughly the constructions of 
the verb. The following is a complete 
classification of these constructions : — 

i. Baptizein with the preposition "in" 
(Gr., en) of 

" Wilderness," Mk. i : 4. 

"Jordan," Mk. 1 : 5 (cf. Mk. 1 : 9, below, 20). 

" Aenon," Jn. 3 : 23. 

1. " Water," Matt. 3 : 11 ; Jn. 1 : 26, 31, 33. 

2. " Sea," 1 Cor. 10 : 2. 

3. " Cloud," 1 Cor. 10 : 2. 

4. " Fire," Matt. 3 : 11 ; Lk. 3 : 16. 

5. " Holy Spirit," Matt. 3 : 11 ; Mk. 1:8; 
Lk. 3 : 16 ; Jn. 1 : 33 ; Acts 1 : 5 ; 11 : 16. 

c, Baptizein with " in " and the word " Name " (represent- 
ing a person), Acts 10: 48; 2: 38 (Westcott and 

Hort's text). 

44 



a. Places 



6. The element 



Classifications of Constructions. 45 



2. Baptizein with "into" (Gr., eis) of 

a. Place, " Jordan," Mk. 1 : 9 (cf. Mk. 1 : 5). 
' Water . 



b. Element. 



Holy Spirit - 

Fire , 

Cloud 

Sea . 



c. With the term " Name" Matt. 28 : 19 ; Acts 8 : 16 ; 19 : 5 ; 
1 Cor. 1 : 13, 15. 



d. Persons. 



e. Things. 



" Christ," Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3 : 27. 
" Moses," 1 Cor. 10: 2. 

" Repentance," Matt. 3 : 11. 
" What," Acts 19 : 3. 

" The death " of Jesus Christ, Rom. 6: 3. 
11 One body," 1 Cor. 12: 13. 
I " The baptism of John," Acts 19 : 3. 



3. Baptizein with "upon" (Gr., epi). 

a. " The name," Acts 2 : 38. 

This class has been formed out of deference to Professors 
Hackett and Hovey, who prefer this reading to that of West- 
cott and Hort, Weymouth and others (cf. above 1. c), 

4. Baptizein with "into" and "in." 

I in {en) the cloud 
and 
in the sea." 1 Cor. 10: 2, 



46 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

5. With "in" (en) and "into" (eis). 

a. " In water into repentance/' Matt. 3 : 11. 

b. " In one Spirit into one body." 1 Cor. 12 : 13. 

6. With " by " (hupo) of the agent. 

a. By the Baptist, Matt. 3 : 13, 14 ; Mk. 1:9; Lk. 3:7; 
7: 30. 

7. With " in behalf of," "for" (huper). 

a. " In behalf of the dead." 1 Cor. 15 : 29. 

8. "Baptizein" with the word "bap- 
tism/' but without a preposition. 

a . " The baptism " of suffering, Mark 10 : 38, 39. 

b. " The baptism of John," Luke 7 : 29. 

c. " The baptism of repentance," Acts 19 : 4. 

The former is translated by the Ameri- 
can Bible Union, a Baptist translation, 
" Endure the immersion which I endure." 
The Greek verb never signifies "endure" 
This rendition is a tacit confession that 
the verb "baptizein" does not always in 
the New Testament denote "immersion." 
More pronounced confessions may be 
found in Dr. T. J. Conant's book. 



Classifications of Constructions. 47 

9. We find the verb frequently used 
with a noun, but without a preposition in 
the same sense as with the preposition. 

a. "Baptize (with or in) water," Mark i: 8; Luke 3: 16; 

Acts 1 : 5 ; n : 16 ; cf. Matt. 3:11; John 1 : 31. 

b. " Baptize (with or in) Holy Spirit," Mark 1 : 8 (W. H.), 

cf. Matt. 3 : 11. 

10. Of the baptism of self Mark 7 : 4, 
where, however, Westcott and Hort adopt 
a different reading, namely, "sprinkle 
themselves." 



CHAPTER VI. 

DISCUSSION OF THE FOREGOING DATA. 

I. A comparison of Acts IO : 48 (cf. 2 : 
38 Westcott and Hort's Greek Testament) 
with Matt. 28 : 19 ; Acts 8 : 16 ; 19:5; 
1 Cor. 1 : 13, 15 shows that "baptize in the 
name" is synonymous with " baptize into 
the name." The American Bible Union 
translates both " into (Gr., eis) the name/' 
Acts 8 : 16, and "in (Gr., en) the name," 
Acts 10 : 48, by the same phrase — " in the 
name" (cf. Luke 8: 8 "fell into good 
ground" with Luke 8: 15 "in good 
ground " ; Mark 4:7" into the thorns " 
with Luke 8:7" fell in the midst of the 
thorns," etc.). The Septuagint usage 
gives abundant evidence of this. 

II. A comparison of Acts 2 : 38 (" upon, 

48 



Discussion of Data. 49 

epi, the name ") with Acts 10 148 u in the 
name " shows that the two phrases are 
synonymous. Compare also " casting out 
demons in thy name " Mark 9 : 38 with 
"casting out demons upon thy name," 
Luke 9 : 49 ; also Mark 4:8" into good 
ground with Mark 4 : 20 " upon good 
ground "; Matt. 13 : 7 "upon the thorns " 
with Matt. 13 : 22 " into the thorns " ; Matt. 
13 : 7 "fell upon the thorns " with Mark 
4:7" fell into the thorns " and Luke 8 : 7 
"fell *'« /^ midst of the thorns " ; Matt. 
13:8 "fell upon good ground " with Mark 
4 : 8, Luke 8:8" fell into good ground " ; 
Matt. 13 : 22 "sown into the thorns " with 
Mark 4 : 18 "sown upon the thorns" 
and Luke 8:14 " fell into the thorns " ; 
Matt. 13 : 23, Mark 4 : 20 " sown upon the 
good ground " with Luke 8 : 15. These 
and other passages which might be ad- 
duced, show that "into," "upon," and 
" in " are often used by some, if not by all 



50 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

of the New Testament writers as synony- 
mous. In the Septuagint each of these 
prepositions is used to translate the 
Hebrew word for "in." Evidence of this 
may be found by reading the Septuagint 
of Genesis and Hosea, etc., and comparing 
them with the Hebrew text. 

III. Matt. 3 : li ; John i : 26, "Bap- 
tize in (Gr., en) water," when com- 
pared with Mark 1:8; Luke 3 : 16; 
Acts 1:5; 11 : 16 ("baptize with, or in, 
water "), we shall see that these expres- 
sions were used to convey the same 
thought (cf. Sept., "bathe in water" with 
"bathe with water." Both render the 
same Hebrew). 

Which of these expressions shall be 
regarded as the normal one ? The Rev. 
G. W. Clarke, d.d., a Baptist writer of 
eminence, and the American Bible Union 
insist that we should read both, "in 
water." To do this is to make the Greek 



Discussion of Data. 5 1 

phrase, "in water," the standard in accord- 
ance with which the rendering of the 
other phrase "(with) water" (Mark 1 :8, 
etc.) must be given. The Revised Ver- 
sion, on the other hand, insists that the 
latter should be the standard ; hence it 
translates both phrases by the words 
"with water." In this rendition " water " 
denotes the instrument used in baptizing ; 
in that, the element in which the baptizing 
is done. Winer and Buttmann, the best 
authorities on New Testament grammar, 
render these phrases by "with water." 
Their testimony is not, of course, decisive, 
but it is worthy of great respect. The 
Septuagint usage favors " with water." 
No one will question that the translation, 
" with water," represents the usual force 
of the Greek construction found in Mark 
1:8; Luke 3 : 16 (a dative without a 
preposition). The Greek preposition "in" 
(en) is frequently used of the instrument 



52 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

with which an act is performed. The 
American Bible Union itself translates 
the Greek word by "with" in the follow- 
ing places : — Mark I : 23 ; 4 : 24 ; 5:2; 
9:1, 50 (" wherewith ") ; Mark 3 : 22 
(" through ") ; Mark 9 : 29, 33, 34 ; 11: 28, 
29, 33> etc., "by." 

The following similar constructions and 
their translations, for they are in every 
respect like that of Mark 1:8; Luke 3 : 
16, etc. (" Baptize with the waves of the 
sea " ; " Baptize as with successive waves " ; 
"Baptize with whole seas of wailings " ; 
"Baptized by" — hupo y same Greek as 
in Matt. 3:13, 14; Mark 1:9, etc. — 
"that great wave") show clearly that 
"Baptize with water" is the proper ren- 
dering of the Greek phrase when used 
of men without a preposition. The previ- 
ous quotations are taken from Dr. Conant's 
great book. In each of them the baptiz-. 
ing is accomplished by the overflowing 



Discussion of Data. 53 

of the waves rather than by the dipping of 
the person into the waves. The use of 
the verb in the Old Testament agrees 
with this. The "baptism in the Holy- 
Spirit " was an " outpouring " of the Spirit 
upon the disciples. 

The manner in which the baptism 
with the Holy Spirit was accomplished, 
namely, by the coming of the Spirit upon 
men, rather than by their being put into 
the Spirit, proves conclusively that the 
" water " is the means of baptism ; con- 
sequently John baptized with water. The 
Holy Spirit is the movable element, in one 
clause, and the water in the other clause 
of the Baptist's words (cf. Matt. 3:11; 
Mark 1:8); the Spirit is conceived as a 
liquid with which the baptizing is done. 
And this pouring forth of a liquid object 
is called " baptizing " by the Baptist and 
Peter and Jesus. All of the apostles give 
their sanction to this usage. And this, as 



54 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

we have seen, is the ritualistic Old Testa- 
ment signification of the verb. Indeed, 
it is the only Old Testament meaning. The 
people are never spoken of in Scripture as 
the movable element or object, when con- 
nected with the expression, " baptize with 
the Holy Spirit/' From this fact we see 
that we never should translate the Greek 
by " baptize in the Holy Spirit/' And 
since the " baptism with the Holy Spirit," 
represented as a liquid element, is the 
"pouring forth " of the same upon the 
persons baptized, then the " baptism with 
water" must, therefore, denote the applica- 
tion of water to men ; hence the Greek 
phrase ought to be rendered as we have 
done. This interpretation agrees with the 
fact that the Jews had never before im- 
mersed men into water. 

IV. With the preposition "into," 
"unto," or "in" (eis) the element is not 
used once, unless we regard the word 



Discussion of Data. 5 5 

" Jordan " as the name of the water of the 
river, John usually baptizing near the 
river rather than in it (cf . Mark 1:9; 
Matt. 3:6; John 3 123; 1 : 28 ; Mark 1 14). 
He baptized in Aenon, Bethania beyond 
the Jordan, the wilderness. Some, if not 
all, of these are the names of districts. 
The word Jordan may also have been used 
as a designation of the bed of the river 
as well as the water itself. A comparison 
of Mark 1 :g and Matt. 3:13 leads me to 
think that in the former verse we have 
an instance of the Greek " constructio 
pregnans," (condensed construction). The 
full thought is given thus, " Jesus came 
from Nazareth of Galilee unto (eis) the 
Jordan, and was baptized by him in the 
Jordan/' Or we may render the Greek, 
after the analogy of Mark 1 : 39 ; Luke 
21 • 37 i John 9:7: " Jesus came from 
Nazareth of Galilee unto (eis) the Jordan 
and was baptized there by John." This 



$6 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

rendering would harmonize best with the 
statements usually made that John bap- 
tized (purified) in "Aenon," "Bethania," 
"the wilderness " ; for each of these was 
in the Jordan district. The precise force 
of the preposition in Mark i : 9 depends 
upon the meaning of the verb "baptize." 
Its use when used with this verb has 
already been explained under I and II 
(pp. 48, 49). 

V. The range of objects into which, 
or the elements with which, the baptizing 
is done shows that the verb is used very 
loosely (cf. classes 2-7, pp. 45, 46). 



CHAPTER VII. 

DISCUSSION OF DATA CONTINUED. 

VI. In classes 4 and 5 we find together 
the use of the two prepositions — " in " 
and " into." Here they are distinguished 
from each other. The context shows 
clearly that we should not translate the 
Greek of either verse as follows : " Im- 
merse in, or into." The latter preposition 
may be rendered in these phrases by 
"unto," e.g., " Baptized unto Moses in," 
etc. This rendering was adopted by the 
American Bible Union, a Baptist transla- 
tion, in several verses besides this (1 Cor. 
10 : 2 ; Matt. 3:11; cf. also the examples 
on pp. 44-46, and Acts 19:3). But the 
Baptist authorities are inconsistent in their 

translation of this Greek preposition, even 
57 



58 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

in similar constructions (cf. '" Immersed into 
[eis] Jesus Christ " ; Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3 : 27 
with "unto Moses " ; also Rom. 6 14 " into 
\eis~\ death," " into \eis~\ one body," 1 Cor. 
12: 13 ; with "unto \eis~\ repentance" Matt. 
3:11," unto what " ; " unto John's immer- 
sion," Acts 19:3; also Matt. 28 : 19 ; 1 Cor. 
1 : 13, 15 ; Acts 8:16; 19:5; " Immersed 
in [m]-fname" with Acts 10:48 " Im- 
mersed in [V/z]-|-name"). Prof. A. Hovey, 
a Baptist, prefers to read Acts 19:5 thus, 
"into or unto the name." Dr. Conant, 
in his book, translates Tertullian's phrase 
("in patrem," Matt. 28:19), "Immersed 
into the Father, and the Son," etc. 

No adequate reason, it seems to me, can 
be given for the varying usage of the 
Bible Union and of Dr. Conant. If we 
read "unto Moses," why not read "unto 
Christ" ? for both phrases have the same 
author, verb, preposition, and they have 
similar objects — persons. If we read " unto 



Discussion of Data. 59 

repentance," "unto John's immersion," 
why not read "unto one body," " unto his 
death " ? The " unto repentance " denotes 
" that they might repent " ; the latter 
"that they might die to sin." Such stress 
is laid upon these prepositions by our 
Baptist brethren as would indicate that 
they believed that the New Testament 
writers used these words with scientific 
precision. Such a belief is, as we have 
seen (cf. I, II), contrary to fact. These 
prepositions are used very loosely in the 
Septuagint and in the New Testament. 

VII. Our data teach also that the verb 
" baptizein " does not imply tJie application of 
zvater to the baptized ; or that the person 
is baptized into water, or even into a liquid 
element (Mark 1:8; Matt. 3:11; Luke 
3:16; John 1 : 33 ; 1 Cor. 10 : 2 ; 12:13; 
Mark 10:38, 39; cf. Is. 21:4, LXX 
" Lawlessness baptizes me " ). In support 
of this statement several passages might 



60 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

be adduced from the book of Dr. Conant. 
The following may be taken as samples : 
"Baptized the whole sword into his 
own neck" (p. 33); " Death to her, 
while yet baptized in the body" (p. 35); 
" Steel baptized in fire" (p. 38). The 
element is always expressed in the context, 
not in the verb. These facts should be 
remembered, for they may have important 
bearing upon the whole question of bap- 
tism as taught, on the one hand, by Jesus, 
and as practiced, on the other, by the 
Church. In view of these facts, it must 
be proven in each instance that the verb 
implies the use of water (e. g., Matt. 28 : 
19; Mark 16: 16). 

VIII. The noun "baptisma " (baptism) 
is not used as a synonym of water in 
the New Testament (Mark 10:38, 39; 
Luke 12:50; 7:29; Matt. 3:7; Acts 
19:3, 4 ; Eph. 4:5); neither does it always 
imply the idea, "water" (Mark 10 : 38, 39; 



Discussion of Data. 61 

Luke 12 : 50; i Peter 3 : 21 ; cf. 1 Cor. 10: 
2). I leave the disputed passages, Rom. 
6 : 3, 4 ; Col. 2:12; Eph. 4 : 5, out of the 
question at present. 

IX. The New Testament speaks of 
several baptisms (cf. Heb. 9:10). Be- 
sides those referred to in the passage here 
quoted, we read of the baptism "into 
Moses," the baptism of John, the baptism 
of Jesus (Mark 10 : 38), and the baptisms 
(" in spirit and fire ") by Jesus (Matt. 3 : 
11 ; Acts 1 : 5). Whenever, therefore, we 
come to a passage containing the word 
"baptism," we must ascertain, as far as 
possible, the particular baptism to which 
reference is made. In general, the context 
will make this clear. In no case must we 
assume that it refers to the Johannine or 
other baptism with water (cf. Mark 16 : 16). 

Radical differences exist between the 
baptism of John and those of Jesus, 
especially that "with the Holy Spirit." 



62 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

a. Whenever the Johannine and Christ- 
ine baptisms are mentioned in the same 
context, they are always contrasted, John 
baptized with water, but Jesus with (the) 
Holy Spirit and fire. John never " bap- 
tized with (the) Spirit and fire " ; and 

Jesus never, as far as we know, baptized 
with water (cf. John 4:1, 2). 

b. The baptism of John was a prepara- 
tory rite intended to prepare the Jews to 
believe on Jesus (John 1:31; Acts 19 14; 
cf. Mai. 3:1; 4 : 5, 6 ; Is. 40 : 3-7). 

c. The baptism of John was intended 
for the Jews only, while that of Jesus was 
for both Jews and Gentiles. In proof of 
the former statement, we have the prophe- 
cies respecting John (Is. 40 : 3 ; Mai. 3:1; 
4:5, 6 ; Luke 1 : 14-17, 67-79) 5 anc * the 
historic fact that he baptized only Jews. 
The work aimed at and accomplished by 
John throws the best light upon his pur- 
pose. Besides the forenamed evidences, 



Discussion of Data. 63 

we have the explicit statement of the 
Baptist himself (John 1:31), of Jesus 
(Matt. 11:12, 13; 17:10-13; Luke 7: 
24-30, etc.), and of Paul (Acts 13 : 24, 25 ; 
l 9 : 3> 4)- The Jews received the baptism 
with the Holy Spirit only after being bap- 
tized with water ; but the first Gentile 
Christians received the baptism of the 
Holy Spirit before and independent of the 
baptism with water (Acts 10 :44 ; 11:15). 
Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, was not 
authorized to baptize with water (1 Cor. 1 : 
17). And yet there is no evidence that 
his authority was any less than that of 
the Twelve (2 Cor. 1 1 : 5). 



CHAPTER VIII. 

DISCUSSION OF THE NOUN " BAPTISM " 
AND ITS USES. 

We come now to the data connected 
with the use of the noun " baptism " 
(baptisma). 

i. " One baptism," Eph. 4 : 5. 

2. "Baptisms of cups, and pots, and 
brazen vessels," Mark 7:4. 

3. "Divers baptisms," Heb. 9: 10. 

4. "The teaching of baptisms," Heb. 
6:2. 

5. " Which also after a true likeness 
doth now save you, even baptism, not the 
putting away of the filth of the flesh ; 
but the interrogation of a good conscience 
towards God," 1 Pet. 3 :2i. 

6. " We were buried therefore with him 

64 



The Noun "Baptism" 6$ 

through (the) baptism into the (his) death," 
etc., Rom. 6 : 3, 4. 

"Buried with him in the (his) baptism," 
Col. 2:12. 

7. " When they come from the market 
place, except they sprinkle (W. H.), bap- 
tize (R. V.) themselves, they eat not," 
Mark 7 : 4. 

" They marvelled that he had not first 
baptized before dinner," Luke 11 138. 

8. " Baptized for (huper, in behalf of) 
the dead," 1 Cor. 15 : 29. 

9. Compare also Acts 8 : 36-39 ; Matt. 
3 : 13-17 ; Mark 1 : 1-8 ; Luke 3 : 1-5. 

Upon some of the foregoing we remark : 
I. The sprinkling or baptizing of self 
before eating (Mark 7 : 4) is not commanded 
by the Old Testament or by the New. 
A comparison of this with John 2 : 6, 
where we read of the "stone waterpots 
according to the purification of the Jews " 
favors the thought that this washing of 



66 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

the hands was performed by the applica- 
tion of water to the hands. The Jewish 
custom required the pouring of the water 
upon the hands (cf. Luke 7 : 44, etc.). 
The hands were not washed by dipping; 
the dipping, if ever performed, was simply 
to secure water to pour upon the hands, 
for only with flowing or moving water was 
the cleansing effected. 1 

II. The " baptism of cups," etc. (Mark 
7 : 4), was a custom which sprang, doubt- 
less, from the laws of purification. These 
applied to the dwellings and furniture of 
the unclean men. All of such objects 
were cleansed by sprinkling water upon 
them (Lev. 14:48-53; 15:13; Num. 19: 
14-22) ; consequently this word baptism 
signifies purification by sprinkling. This, 
we have seen, is the ritualistic meaning of 
the noun in Josephus. 



iCf. pp. 42, 43, also Wilkinson's Egyptian Manners and 
Customs, pp. 76, 77. 



The Noun "Baptism" 6y 

III. Heb. 6:1,259: 10 need no particu- 
lar attention. The expression " baptizing 
for the dead " (1 Cor. 15:29) gives us no 
light upon our subject. The mode was 
doubtless sprinkling. This verse may- 
signify that some persons were purified 
not only for themselves, but also in behalf 
of Jewish or heathen relatives who died 
without the gospel, but whom these purified 
persons desired should be saved. 

IV. " One baptism " (Eph. 4 : 5). In 
studying this verse we should recall the 
fact that the noun "baptism'' does not 
imply the use of water ; hence we must 
prove that the term implies here the use 
of water. Paul, who was not authorized 
to baptize with water (1 Cor. 1:17), doubt- 
less refers here to the " baptism into 
Christ " (cf. Rom. 6 : 4-6 ; Gal. 3 : 27; 
Col. 2:12), or to the baptism with the 
Holy Spirit, inasmuch as these are the 
only essential Christian baptisms. He 



68 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

certainly would not speak of the baptism 
with water in this connection, as though 
it were the only Christian baptism ; for it 
was not considered by the Baptist (Mark 
i : 8) ; by his disciples (Acts 19 : 3, 4) ; by 
Jesus (Acts 1:5)1 or by Paul (Acts 19: 
3-5) as the Christian baptism. Even 
though we make it refer (as most of the 
best exegetes do) to the Johannine rite, 
the verse makes no reference to the mode 
of this baptism ; consequently the verse 
has little bearing upon our subject. 

V. "Baptized into one body" (1 Cor. 
12:13). Before entering upon the con- 
sideration of this verse, recall the fact 
that "baptizein" (to baptize) does not 
necessarily imply the use of water. The 
context seems to favor the idea that Paul 
is referring to the baptism with the Holy 
Spirit ("For in one Spirit we were all 
baptized into one body "). Christ is the 
body. It cannot signify "one body of 



The Noun "Baptism" 69 

water"; for verses 12, 27 show that the 
body is Christ; hence to be " baptized 
into one body " is to be baptized into 
Christ Jesus (cf. Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3 : 27). 

Observe that "all were baptized with 
(in) one Spirit." The only spirit with 
which all believers in Jesus were baptized 
is the Holy Spirit, or, what is less likely, 
the spirit of faith. Paul believed that 
every Christian had received, or ought to 
receive this baptism with the Holy Spirit 
(cf. Acts 19 : 3-6 with 1 Cor. 12:13). 

Paul, it is true, does not use the phrase, 
"Baptize with the Holy Spirit" (cf. Beet, 
1 Cor.), in his epistles ; but he clearly im- 
plies that his readers have received the 
Spirit (1 Cor. 13:3-11; 12:28; 14:33, 
etc. 1 ) ; for only after and in the reception 
of the Holy Spirit did men receive the 
gifts mentioned in these passages. To 
say, therefore, with Beet, that the absence 

1 Cf. Galatians 3 : 2. 



70 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

of the above phrase is evidence that Paul 
did not employ the words, "one baptism," 
of the " baptism with the Holy Spirit," 
is to make a baseless affirmation. If 
Beet's objection be valid, then Paul could 
not use " one baptism " of " baptism 
with water " (Professor Beet's conception) ; 
inasmuch as Paul never uses the expres- 
sion, " Baptize with water " (Matt. 3:11; 
Mark 1:8). This argument from silence 
must be used with greater caution than 
Professor Beet has done in the present 
instance. The parallel Pauline expression 
strongly favors my interpretation (cf. 
" Baptized into Moses "). 

VI. Evidently the words of Peter (1 
Peter 3:21) teach that he designated by 
the term " baptism " the rite of purify- 
ing the body from filth, and also "the 
interrogation of a good conscience toward 
God." 






CHAPTER IX. 

"BURIED with him in his baptism." 

Our next duty is the study of Col. 2:12, 
which may be translated, " Buried with him 
in his (Gr., 'the') baptism, wherein also 
we were raised through faith in the work- 
ing of God, who raised him from the dead." 
* In the context of this passage, the 
apostle makes no reference to the " bap- 
tism with water." Indeed, he nowhere 
in this epistle refers to the subject un- 
less in this verse. The burden of proof 
therefore rests upon those who affirm that 
this verse contains such a reference. The 
presence of the noun " baptism" is no 
evidence of it, for that, as we have shown, 
does not necessarily imply the use of 
water. To what baptism does the apostle 



72 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

refer ? — to the baptism a with water/ 1 
"with the Holy Spirit," "into Christ," or 
of suffering? Which was Christ's bap- 
tism ? Does he make a reference to the 
baptism of his readers " into the name 
of the Father," etc., or to the baptism of 
Jesus on their behalf? The article "the," 
which is in Greek before "baptism" may- 
be properly rendered "his" (baptism) as 
in Matt. 3 : 7 (Revised Version). The 
American Bible Union translates the 
article thus, "With him in the immer- 
sion." Which immersion ? 

Is there any reference here to some 
actual, external form of baptism ? The 
verb " buried with " does not prove this. 
The context shows that this verse cannot 
refer to any external rite. In verse eleven 
we are taught that Christ is " the head of 
every principality and power ; in whom ye 
were also circumcised with a circumcision 
not made with hands in the putting off of 



Buried in Baptism. 73 

the body (cf. 1 Peter 3 : 21) of the flesh, in 
the circumcision of Christ." This circum- 
cision is definitely differentiated from the 
external act, and yet it seems to be as 
objective as " the burial " and " the bap- 
tism " of the following verse, which we 
are considering. The resurrection which 
follows "the burial" is not an external, 
actual resurrection of the body from 
either the grave or from water; hence 
the "burial" cannot have been used in a 
literal sense in either of these verses. 
This highly figurative passage cannot be 
shown, in accordance with the laws of 
hermeneutics, to refer to either the Johan- 
nine or the apostolic water-baptism. 

As the circumcision here mentioned is 
the mystical one realized for us in the cir- 
cumcision of Christ, so the baptism is most 
probably the baptism of Christ ; hence 
we should read, "Buried with him in his 
baptism." 



74 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

Shall we say that " his baptism " signifies 
the " baptism " which he received from the 
hands of the Baptist, or the baptism of 
suffering to which he alluded, or the bap- 
tism with the Holy Spirit, which he 
administers ? 

In view of the indefinite character of 
this figurative verse, it is unscholarly to 
assume that " baptism " denotes the water- 
baptism, and that " buried with " was in- 
tended to picture the mode of baptism 
with water. Most of the discussions of 
this verse have assumed these two thoughts, 
instead of proving that they were in the 
mind of Paul. The context and the au- 
thority of Paul, etc., lead me to believe 
that "His baptism " refers to the baptism 
of suffering. The reference to the resur- 
rection which follows favors this belief. 

Analogous with this verse is Rom. 6 : 3, 
4 : "Or are ye ignorant, brethren, that as 
many as were baptized into Christ were 



Buried in Baptism. 7$ 

baptized into his death ? We were buried 
therefore with him through the (or his) 
baptism into the (or his) death in order 
that as Christ was raised from the dead, 
so we also might walk in newness of life. ,, 

This is another of the highly figurative 
passages in which Paul is expressing his 
favorite thought — the union of the be- 
liever with Jesus Christ in both His 
death and resurrection. The expressions, 
as has been said in another place, are 
purely Pauline ; consequently they must 
be interpreted in the light of their con- 
text and in harmony with the rest of Paul's 
teaching. 

The " crucifixion with Christ " (v. 6) 
should be taken as literally as the " burial 
with" him (v. 4). Indeed, it is the only 
phrase in the context which indicates how 
the believers died so as to necessitate a 
burial with Jesus. If the burial denotes a 
literal, external act, — immersion in water, 



y6 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

— then the crucifixion denotes a literal, 
external act — the impaling upon a tree. 
But this is contrary to fact ; hence the 
crucifixion and burial cannot, in reference 
to the believers, refer to external actions. 
The " dying with Christ " (v. 8), " the 
becoming united with him by the likeness 
of his death " (v. 5) show that the " burial 
with " cannot denote any external action 
or experience of the believer; therefore 
it cannot refer to immersion in water. 

In connection with this passage the 
following thoughts should be considered : 

1. The verb and the noun, "baptizein" 
and "baptisma," do not necessarily imply 
the use of water. The noun is not a 
synonym of the word "water." 

2. It must therefore be proved from 
these contexts — preceding and following 

— that "baptism" refers to the baptism 
with water. Nowhere else in this epistle 
is there any reference to this subject (bap- 



Buried in Baptism. 77 

tism with water). Is it likely then that 
the writer, who had no authority to baptize 
with water (1 Cor. 1 : 17), expresses the 
mode of baptism with water in this highly 
figurative passage ? Indeed, we have only 
a probability to justify our believing that 
the Roman believers were baptized with 
water. 

3. Shall we read in verse 4, " through 
(for this is the literal sense of the Greek) 
the baptism," or "his baptism"? The 
American Bible Union translates the Greek 
for "the death" by "his death." In dis- 
cussing Col. 2:12 evidence has been given 
to show that the rendering "his baptism " 
is as justifiable as a his death." Which is 
the better for this place ? Proof, not 
assumptions, must answer. If we read 
"the baptism," then which of the many 
baptisms is designated ? If we read "his 
baptism," then to which of the baptisms 
of Jesus does the apostle refer (cf. note on 



78 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

Col. 2:12, p. 74, for the several baptisms 
which may be in mind) ? 

4. The " burial " here does not take 
place in water, but "through his baptism 
into (or, unto) his death " (cf. vs. 4, 5, 
8, 9). The burial therefore was into the 
death of Jesus. If " death " be taken, as 
it must be, of the historic death of the 
Saviour, then these believers were not 
literally baptized into his death. Since 
this is true it follows that the phrase, 
" buried with him through his baptism," 
cannot have any reference to the water- 
baptism of these believers, or to the mode 
of that baptism. 

But this "baptism into" the death of 
Jesus is here identified with " the baptism 
into Christ " (v. 3). The latter unques- 
tionably cannot signify " immersed (liter- 
ally) into Christ Jesus " ; for such an 
immersion is impossible. The meaning 
of the phrase must be ascertained by a 



Buried in Baptism. 79 

study of the context, and of the use of 
similar Pauline phrases elsewhere (cf. 
1 Cor. 10: 2-4; 12 : 13). 

In these last passages the sense is toler- 
ably evident. The former, we are sure, 
can have no reference to an immersion 
into water, because we are explicitly in- 
formed that water did not come into con- 
tact with any of the Israelites in their 
passage through the Red Sea (cf. 1 Cor. 
10:1-4 with Exod. 14:19-29, etc.). To 
"be baptized by (or, in) the sea" is 
therefore to walk on dry land between the 
two walls of water (Ex. 14:29; 15:8). 
And to " be baptized by (or, in) the cloud" 
is to have the cloud above them, moving 
from before them till it comes behind them 
(Ex. 14 : 19). Historically interpreted, 
"baptism into Moses " denotes that the 
Israelites, by passing through the sea, 
were compelled to follow him. They 
were by these two events (the protection 



80 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

of the cloud and the passage through the 
sea) separated forever from the Egyptians, 
their former masters, and united to Moses, 
their future master. They were united to 
him in fortune and were come under 
his power. Back to Egypt they could not 
go ; forward with him they must hence- 
forth advance. This separation from 
the unclean, the ungodly, and unifica- 
tion with the godly, the clean, are the 
two objects accomplished by the purifica- 
tion of men. This is true of the Essenic 
and of the Jewish purifications. The 
word baptism therefore may be applied 
to the acts described in i Cor. 10 : 1-4 
as well as to those of Judith, Naaman, 
and others. 

With these thoughts in mind study 
afresh Matt. 28 : 19, 20. Dr. Conant him- 
self admits that the verb " baptizein " 
expressed " the coming into a new state of 
life or experience " (italics are his). This 



Buried in Baptism. 81 

historic signification will satisfy the 
respective contexts of I Cor. 12: 13; 
Rom. 6:4; Gal. 3 : 27 (" Brought by one 
Spirit into one body." " Become united 
to Christ "). We might render " Purified 
by one Spirit (cf. Rom. 15:16; 1 Cor. 
1 : 2) for one body," " Purified for Christ." 
Theophylact (1078 a.d.) translates 1 Cor. 
10 : 2, " Shared with Moses!' 

5. The resurrection of the believer, 
which follows his burial, is not a resurrec- 
tion from the water into which he was 
buried ( ? ), but from the death to sin into 
newness of life (cf. also Col. 2:12). 

6. This resurrection is accomplished 
through the believer's faith, not in the 
muscle of the immerser, but in the work- 
ing of God (cf. Col. 2:12 with Rom. 6 : 4). 
The context of these and of the other 
Pauline passages show that separation 
from sin through the baptism and the con- 
sequent union to righteous living are the 



82 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

dominant conceptions of the passages (cf. 
Heb. 10:22 with 1 Peter 3 :2i). 

Enough, I trust, has been written to 
convince the candid investigator that in 
Col. 2:12 and Rom. 6 : 3, 4 there are -no 
grounds for the belief that Paul is depict- 
ing by the verb " buried with " the mode 
of baptizing with water. 



CHAPTER X. 

" BAPTIZING THEM INTO THE NAME." 

We must now direct our attention to 
Matthew 28: 19, 20. "Make disciples of 
all nations by baptizing them into the 
name of the Father ... ; by teaching 
them to observe all things whatsoever I 
commanded you, etc." 

The reader has doubtless observed the 

unique character of this verse. It is the 

only place where we find Jesus using the 

phrase " baptized into the name." Only 

here does he command the disciples to 

baptize any one. In Mark 16:16 he 

makes only an affirmation. The thought 

and language of this verse differ greatly 

from that of Matthew. If we take both 

of these passages as referring to the 
83 



84 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

baptism with water, then in Matthew and 
Mark we have no evidence that Jesus ever 
referred to the " baptism with the Holy 
Spirit." Contrast this fact with the fol- 
lowing : In Luke and John we have no 
statement by Jesus respecting the " bap- 
tism with water." He speaks only of the 
" Spirit-baptism." 

With the preceding we must associate 
the fact that the Baptist always contrasted 
his " water-baptism " with the " Spirit- 
baptism " of Jesus. The Saviour and his 
disciples always, when speaking of both, 
contrast them. In view of these and 
other facts this command in Matthew 
should be fully understood before we 
claim that it refers to baptism with water. 

The phrase which I have rendered " into 
the name" may be translated " in the 
name" (Vulgate ; American Bible Union) j 
"to or for the name" (like the Hebrew 
" /*"). Some would construe it to mean 



Baptizing into the Name. 85 

"with reference to the name"; others, 
" because for the sake of the name" ; while 
Professor J. A. Broadus prefers to give this 
Greek phrase, whenever it appears, the 
following force : " Baptized unto." This 
translation would weaken greatly the 
value of the phrase upon which the im- 
mersion ists lay great stress, namely, " bap- 
tized into ('unto/ Broadus) the Jordan" 
(cf. the use of eis, into, as a loose 
synonym of epi, upon, at, unto). The 
relation of the verb " disciple" to the 
verb " baptize" is brought out in the 
rendering which I have given. The cor- 
rectness of it may be proven by a com- 
parison of this with that precisely parallel 
construction found in 1 Cor. 8:12. To 
this rendering Dr. J. A. Broadus advanced 
an objection, namely: "The general teach- 
ings of Scripture do not allow us to think 
that discipling can be effected [italics his] 
by a ceremony and a subsequent course of 



86 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

instruction in Christ's precepts/' x The 
facts, and I believe the teachings, of the 
New Testament favor the rendering which 
I have adopted. The Twelve became dis- 
ciples of Jesus without a baptismal cere- 
mony. They had been made disciples of 
John through a ceremony and instruction 
to keep, i. e., to practice the precepts of 
John. Keeping his (Jesus') commandments 
is the test of discipleship, friendship, and 
relationship. A disciple is one who learns 
both the precepts of Jesus and the way 
to practice these acceptably (cf. John 4:1; 
Matt. 13:52; Acts 14:22). In view of 
these and other facts the subjective objec- 
tion of Professor Broadus is void of force. 2 
This verse sheds no light whatever 
upon the mode of baptism. Its teaching 
is in full accord with the teaching of the 
passages which we have already studied. 

1 An American Com. on Matthew, p. 594. 

2 This subject is treated at length in my book, soon to be pub- 
lished, on The Spiritual Birth as Taught in the New Testament. 
Compare the statement quoted from Pr, Conant on page 80. 



Baptizing into the Name. 8? 

Those who claim that the verb in this 
command implies the use of water must 
substantiate their claim with evidence 
from the teaching of Jesus. If an appeal 
is made to the practice of the disciples, 
then the advocates of this view should 
prove that the apostles were taught by 
Jesus to do as they did. If we admit that 
this verb implies here the use of water, 
then it does not follow that the command 
meant, "Immerse in water 'into the name." 
The ritualistic use of the verb forbids this. 
If we read it, " Purifying them in the name 
(or ' for the name ') of the Father," etc., 
the context is satisfied. If we read it, 
" Bringing them into union with (or ' into 
subjection to') the name of the Father," 
the context is satisfied. This would accord 
with the teaching of Jesus in John (" Keep 
in thy name," etc., 17: n, 12). "In the 
name " they get " life eternal " and all tem- 
poral blessings (John 15: 16, etc.). 



CHAPTER XL 
"BORN of water and spirit." 

Does Jesus in this verse (John 3 : 5), 
" Except a person be born of water and 
spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of 
God," teach the necessity of baptism with 
water ? No. In support of this negation 
the following facts are offered : — 

1. The verb "born" was never used, 
either before the time of Jesus or during 
the apostolic age, as equivalent to " bap- 
tize." The first one to use the compound 
verb {anagennan) in this sense was Justin 
Martyr. In doing this he blundered. He 
gives no evidence in support of his use of 
the compound verb. 

2. The preposition en, "in," is never 
equal to ek, "out of, from," i. e., "in 
water " never equals "out of water." 

88 



Born of Water and Spirit. 89 

3. The word " water" has no article; 
hence it is used of water in general (cf. 
Meyer and Weiss). 

4. If " born of water " equals " baptize 
with (or in) water," then " born of spirit" 
equals " baptize with spirit." This being 
true, we have lost our doctrine of the new 
birth and have left only " baptism." If 
"born of spirit " equals " baptize with 
spirit," is not then " born of flesh " by 
parity of reasoning equal to " baptize with 
flesh " ? This absurd conclusion follows 
inevitably from the false premise, which 
assumes that "born of water" equals 
"baptize with water." If we substitute 
the word equivalent instead of " equal," 
the logical result will be the same. 

5. Those who interpret "born of water" 
of " baptize with water " base their whole 
conception upon the unsupported assump- 
tion that the word " spirit " denotes " the 
Holy Spirit" This assumption is contrary 



90 Baptism in the Scriptures, 

to the interpretation of the earliest Fathers 
and Versions (cf. Ignatius' Letter to the 
Philadelphians 7:1; Lewis' Gospel; Old 
Syriac and Old Latin Versions). No one 
has ever attempted to show why the 
Church should blindly follow, as it has 
done, the Vulgate. Jesus nowhere else 
uses this word "spirit," without the article 
or the adjective "holy" of the Holy Spirit. 
Be it remembered that there is no article 
in John 3 : 5 before the word "spirit," and 
no one has furnished any reason for its 
insertion or for the capitalization of the 
noun. Why should we manipulate the 
text in this manner in the absence of any 
commanding evidence ? 

6. The context and the grammatical 
structure of the phrase "of water and 
spirit" 1 repudiate the interpretation which 

1 A study of the relations of two nouns joined by a coordinate con- 
junction (kai, and) and governed by a common preposition forbids 
our accepting any of the prevalent interpretations. The only par- 
allel grammatical structure to John 3 : 5, 6 is 1 John 5 : 6. This is 
therefore the key to that. 



Born of Water and Spirit. 91 

finds in this verse any reference to bap- 
tism. " Water and spirit" are here co- 
ordinated ; but in the phrase of the 
Baptist (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1 : 8, etc.) they 
are contrasted. 

7. Not a single, tenable argument has 
ever been advanced for the opinion which 
I have rejected. 

The term " water" here was suggested 
by the term ("koilia") " abdomen" not 
" womb," and signifies the same as 
"flesh," man. This view I have advo- 
cated in public lectures delivered every 
summer since 1888, in Illinois, Wisconsin, 
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kansas, etc. I am 
pleased to see it adopted, though not for 
the same reasons, by Dr. E. B. Fairfield 
(cf. Homiletic Review). 

8. The term "spirit" is here used to 
denote God, for God is "spirit" (John 4: 
24) ; hence " God breatheth (or bloweth) 
where he willeth, thou hearest his voice " 



92 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

(John 3 : 8). This interpretation accounts 
for the usual Johannine phrase " born of 
God" (i: 13). 



CHAPTER XII. 

BAPTISM OF THE EUNUCH. 

The narrative concerning the baptism 
of the eunuch (Acts 8 : 38, 39) has been 
called, by Dr. Conant, " The most circum- 
stantial account given in the New Testa- 
ment of the administration of the rite. ,, 
It reads : " What hindereth me to be bap- 
tized ? And they both went down unto 
(or ' into ') the water, both Philip and the 
eunuch/' 

In studying this passage it may be well 

to remember that the preposition (ezs, 

"into, unto," and ek, "out of, from ") used 

in this verse must not be pressed too much ; 

because they are not used with these verbs 

(" descending " and " ascending ") in a 

very precise manner. The verb "to 
93 



94 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

descend" (katabainein) is used with the 
preposition eis in nine other places in 
the New Testament. In seven of these 
it is rendered in the Baptist translation 
(American Bible Union) by the phrase 
"went down to" (Luke 10:30; 18:14; 
Acts 8:26; 14:25; 16:8; 18:22; 25: 
6) ; in one, " came down on " (Luke 8 : 23) ; 
and in one, "go down into" (Acts 7: 15). 
But in this it ought to have been rendered 
" down to " as well as in most of the first 
passages. The action described in Acts 
8 : 38 is that of going down from the chariot 
"unto" not necessarily into the water (cf. 
Acts 8 : 38 with Luke 18 : 14 ; Gen. 24: 
16, 45, LXX, etc.). The use of the 
preposition epi (upon, towards) with 
this verb in connections similar to those 
of the above seven passages shows that 
the preposition eis does not always, 
even with this verb, signify " into " (cf. 
Josh. 15:7, etc.). This agrees with the 



Baptism of the Eunuch. 95 

use of these prepositions elsewhere in the 
New Testament (cf. chap. v). 

An examination of the use of the verb 
" ascend " (anabainein) with the preposi- 
tion ek shows that it does not neces- 
sarily signify " out of." In Mark 1:10 
we have them to describe the action, 
which, in Matt. 3 : 16, is pictured by 
the verb with apo (away from, from). 1 
This and the instances given in a preced- 
ing chapter ought to be enough to show 
that this preposition and verb are not 
always used in Biblical Greek with such 
precision as would warrant us in laying 
much emphasis upon them (cf. Matt. 7 : 16 
with Luke 6 : 44). The action here de- 
scribed may have been that of ascending 
from the stream or fountain to the road. 
We ought to remember at this p<5int that 
the pictures in the catacombs "all repre- 

1 Professor A. Hovey, in his Commentary on John, writes: " The 
best interpreters now agree that the two Greek prepositions {apo 
and ek) . . . denote the same relation " (cf. John n : i). 



96 Baptism in the Scriptures. 

sent the baptized as standing in a stream, 
and the baptizer on dry ground!' 2 

I am willing, however, for the sake of 
looking at this passage from the Baptist 
view point, to admit that the prepositions 
in question may have the meanings which 
the Baptists give them in these verses. 
But I must then ask, how much water was 
there ? How deep was it ? The Greek 
only says, " A certain (or ' some ') water." 
Until we have definite information respect- 
ing the depth of the water, and until we 
know positively that the ritualistic mean- 
ing of the verb " baptizein " is " to im- 
merse/' nothing should be said about 
immersing the eunuch into the water. 
This was unquestionably a ritualistic act 
in accordance with Jewish customs. 

Observe that we are not told how far 
down into the water they went. Did they 
go to a depth of two, twelve, or thirty-six 

1 Schaff's Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, p. 36. 



Baptism of the Eunuch. 97 

inches? Nothing is said. The " going 
down into " is fulfilled as really when one 
descends to the depth of one inch as when 
he enters a depth of forty inches. The 
" going up out of" is just as real in the 
former as in the latter case. How was 
the baptism performed ? In nude form ? 
Nothing is said about the disrobing, or of 
the putting on again of the garments ; noth- 
ing about their getting wet, the method of 
drying them, or the discomforts of wear- 
ing the wet, loose garments on their re- 
spective journeys. But Orientals never wet 
their garments, except when they cannot 
avoid doing so. They never bathe with them 
on. Why this silence, if the garments 
were taken off ; or if kept on the baptized 
and the baptizer in case of immersion ? 
If the baptism was by affusion, as the 
meaning of the verb demands, or by sprink- 
ling water from the hand, or hyssop, which 
was the customary form, the silence is 



98 Baptism in the Scriptures, 

accounted for easily. These remarks apply 
equally well to every instance of baptism 
recorded in the New Testament. 

What was done with the garments in 
each case ? 

What did Philip do to the eunuch ? He 
"baptized him." How was this accom- 
plished ? According to the pre-Christian, 
Jewish custom of purifying men ? We 
should expect this, not only from our 
knowledge of custom, and from the silence 
of the narrative respecting the garments, 
but also from the ritualistic and apparently 
the only meaning of the verb in Luke's 
writings (cf. Acts 1:5-8 with 2:17, 18, 
33, etc.). Was the eunuch's head dipped 
in the water? (cf. Chrysostom, 350-407 
a.d., who says, " We dip our heads in the 
water." " It is easy for us to dip and to 
lift our heads again " 1 ). This " most cir- 
cumstantial account " is very indefinite. 

1 Homilies on John, 25: 2. 



Baptism of the Eunuch. 99 

In it the mode of baptism depends upon the 
force of the verb which this passage leaves 
unexplained. I have already shown that 
there is nothing in any of these verses out 
of harmony with the ritualistic significa- 
tion of the verb — purify by sprinkling or 
pouring. 

The questions suggested by this account 
are also suggested by the narratives re- 
pecting the baptism of Jesus. In both 
the whole question about the mode of 
administering the rite hangs upon the 
ritualistic meaning of the verb. 



CHAPTER XIII. 



CONCLUSION. 



Before finishing this study, I must ex- 
press the firm conviction that the erratic, 
fanciful exposition of the early Church 
affords us no firm ground for believing 
that their various and varying opinions 
and customs represent accurately the 
teachings and customs of Jesus and of 
his apostles. The least said about them 
as standards in these matters the better 
for the Fathers and for modern scholars. 

In conclusion, we are forced by facts to 
affirm that the data on baptism in Scrip- 
ture teach us that affusion, or more probably 
sprinkling, was the Johannine and apos- 
tolic method of baptizing. The use of 
the verb in the Septuagint, in the New 



Conclusion. IOI 

Testament ; the ritualism of the Old Testa- 
ment, the bathing customs of the Egyp- 
tians, Greeks, Romans, and Jews — ancient 
and modern ; the use of the prepositions 
connected with the verb, coupled with 
a detailed examination of the chief pas- 
sages which speak of baptism, have united 
to lead us to this conclusion. 



